One key difference, Eastern Ukrainians didn't have an election, they had a referendum with no neutral or status quo options and the legitimacy of the referendum is questionable at best. There were international election monitors in Ukraine and not in Eastern Ukraine, etc.

I didn't ask about the referendum in the east. I asked about the coup and subsequent coronation of American puppets via an election during a civil war. There were international election monitors in Crimea, which is the other vote I'm more concerned with. Though I wouldn't care if the vote hadn't happened. Since USG bases her propaganda on democracy and freedom it is an interesting propaganda point to push back on.

One key difference, Eastern Ukrainians didn't have an election, they had a referendum with no neutral or status quo options and the legitimacy of the referendum is questionable at best. There were international election monitors in Ukraine and not in Eastern Ukraine, etc.

I didn't ask about the referendum in the east. I asked about the coup and subsequent coronation of American puppets via an election during a civil war. There were international election monitors in Crimea, which is the other vote I'm more concerned with. Though I wouldn't care if the vote hadn't happened. Since USG bases her propaganda on democracy and freedom it is an interesting propaganda point to push back on.

George Soros pulled his funding of FEMEN b/c they were setting up a branch in Israel. I guess the Open Society has limits.

Yes, I understand why you are pushing back on it, but not why you are doing so with me, as I've mentioned several times that I don't think the elections are the interesting/important parts of what is happening. Russia bases their propaganda on international law, but I don't go bothering you about that.

People came to power through the use of armed force and by unconstitutional means. True, they held elections after the takeover, however, for some strange reason, power ended up again in the hands of those who either funded or carried out this takeover. Meanwhile, without any attempt at negotiations, they are trying to supress by force that part of the population that does not agree with such a turn of events.

At the same time, they present Russia with an ultimatum: either you let us destroy the part of the population that is ethnically, culturally and historically close to Russia, or we introduce sanctions against you. This is a strange logic, and absolutely unacceptable, of course.

Seems clear from that statement that the Russian state uses different frames when addressing her citizens. They use the language of ethnicity, culture and history.

Quote:

However, ever more frequently today we hear of ultimatums and sanctions. The very notion of state sovereignty is being washed out. Undesirable regimes, countries that conduct an independent policy or that simply stand in the way of somebody’s interests get destabilised. Tools used for this purpose are the so-called colour revolutions, or, in simple terms – takeovers instigated and financed from the outside.

People came to power through the use of armed force and by unconstitutional means. True, they held elections after the takeover, however, for some strange reason, power ended up again in the hands of those who either funded or carried out this takeover. Meanwhile, without any attempt at negotiations, they are trying to supress by force that part of the population that does not agree with such a turn of events.

At the same time, they present Russia with an ultimatum: either you let us destroy the part of the population that is ethnically, culturally and historically close to Russia, or we introduce sanctions against you. This is a strange logic, and absolutely unacceptable, of course.

Seems clear from that statement that the Russian state uses different frames when addressing her citizens. They use the language of ethnicity, culture and history.

Quote:

However, ever more frequently today we hear of ultimatums and sanctions. The very notion of state sovereignty is being washed out. Undesirable regimes, countries that conduct an independent policy or that simply stand in the way of somebody’s interests get destabilised. Tools used for this purpose are the so-called colour revolutions, or, in simple terms – takeovers instigated and financed from the outside.

For example: FEMEN in Ukraine but not Israel.

I am sure that they also use the international law stuff on their own population. I also talked to an official from USAID today, and they were very clear that they have a foreign policy purpose and that they are acting to further U.S. interests. None of this is surprising.

I feel like in this conversation I have not really been that interested in arguing against what the Russians are doing, although there is a strong case to make against it, but against people's misperceptions about what is happening.